PT1.S4.Q24 - Although all contemporary advertising tries to persuade

TorontoVSallTorontoVSall Alum Member
edited November 2019 in Logical Reasoning 104 karma

Although all contemporary advertising tried to persuade...only a small portion

I don't understand why E is right and C is wrong. Sufficient condition of being a good manager is failed in C so some must indeed B good managers on the basis of the premises. Is it not parallel because of that one extra step of failing sufficient?

40% chose C as the right answer and only 5% more percent got it right with E, yet I can't find a discussion of this difficult question anywhere.

Admin note: edited title; please use the format of "PT#.S#.Q# - [brief description]"

Comments

  • TorontoVSallTorontoVSall Alum Member
    104 karma

    Anyone? I don't know if I am allowed to bump my own thread, but I feel like this is a worthy discussion. It's one of the most difficult parallel reasoning questions judging by the split in wrong-right AC choice %ages. I would encourage anyone who struggles with parallel reasoning to take a look at it so we can have a discussion about it.

  • Little GrasshopperLittle Grasshopper Member
    edited November 2019 232 karma

    Okay, If you look at the question a bit closer. You will notice that the question has a flaw. The question has a part to whole flaw quality to it. Second, we want to parallel the structure.

    Diagramming the argument:
    Contemporary Advertising-->Persuade

    Morally Apprehensive--S-->Contemporary Advertising

    Persuasion--S-->Morally Apprehensive

    Let's look at C:. Here is where C gets it wrong speaking about a manager and not all managers. It is not saying ALL just a manager. The first premise gets it wrong. The last two premise negate each one meaning the some with all.

    Premise 2 - Managers-->Not Fail
    Premise 3 - Managers ---> Good Manager

    C will not work because second premise is what kills it.

    Now, let's look at E. It is flipped around and let's untangle it.

    Sonnets--> Short Poems
    Sonnets---S--->Pluralism
    Short Poems--S--> Pluralistic

    It matches the argument's structure, and E is the right answer.

  • Sailor Moon LSATSailor Moon LSAT Member ⭐
    200 karma

    I'm still struggling on this question. I know why E is right but I'm having a hard time finding fault with C. #help

  • canihazJDcanihazJD Alum Member Sage ⭐
    8491 karma

    Managers and good managers are not the same thing.

    Also, "some managers fail to do this" diverges from the stimulus structure, leading to a different argument form.

    https://i.imgur.com/HYtEnBc.jpg

  • Sailor Moon LSATSailor Moon LSAT Member ⭐
    200 karma

    @canihazJD I see that good manager and managers are not the same, but if you take the contrapositive of the GM --> DAD, you get M some /DAD --> GM, which is a valid argument. However, I guess because there is a negation of an idea it fails to follow the stimulus even though an argument form could still be the same?

  • McBeck418McBeck418 Member
    500 karma

    But even if you made that argument you're not paralleling the form/relationship provided.

    In M some /DAD--->/GM you're creating a subset out a whole. There is a group of managers, some of whom are not good.

    This is not the same relationship as the stimulus which suggests a cross-section (under the domain of contemporary advertising) between things that are persusuave and things that are morally reprehensible

    CA-->P
    CA some MR
    Therefore P some MR

    C presents an argument, but its not the same argument.

  • Sailor Moon LSATSailor Moon LSAT Member ⭐
    200 karma

    @McBeck418 thank you!!! that was really illuminating.

  • McBeck418McBeck418 Member
    500 karma

    @"Merly Goodleaf" I'm glad that could help a bit!

Sign In or Register to comment.